Akash v. State Of Haryana
- 1 -
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 17.03.2026 Akash . . . Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Haryana . . . Respondent(s)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Navdeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioner(s).
Mr. P.K. Jhanda, Sr. DAG, Haryana.
**** SANJAY VASHISTH , J. (Oral) 1.
Present petition has been filed under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 439 Cr.P.C.), for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, during the pendency of trial, who has been booked in a criminal case arising out of First Information Report, as detailed here-under:- Name of Petitioner(s) FIR No.
Date Section(s) Police Station District Akash 426 02.12.2023 302, 34 of IPC, 1860 Arya Nagar Rohtak 2.
Allegations in FIR reads as under:- "
To. SHO, P.S. Arya Nagar, Rohtak. Respected sir, it is humbly submitted that I am Radhika wife of Jitender (aged 48 years) resident of House No.965/31, Kamla Nagar, Jhajjar Chungi, Rohtak. I have opened up a beauty parlor under the name and style of Seven Haven in Housing Board, Rohtak. I have one son aged 19 years. My sister is Devi Ariyal wife of Kaladhar Sharma resident of House No.254, Subhash Nagar, Rohtak. She has three children, having 2 boys, of whom Raju Sharma is elder and second is Bikal Ariyal and third is daughter Sangeeta wife of Praveen Pokhrel, resident of village Bhutol, Nepal. That my sister Devi Ariyal and brother-in-law (Jija) Kaladhar Sharma reside in their village
- 2 - Bangai, district Kapil Vastu, Nepal. That my nephew (Bhatija) Raju Sharma works in Rohtak in wedding events and Hotels as a cook. That yesterday on dated 01.12.2023 at around 8:00 o'clock in the night I was going from the direction of old ITI Rohtak for some person work. At that moment I saw my nephew Raju Sharma standing with Akash son of Farash and Padan son of Prem residents of Nepal, fighting with him and that Akash was carrying a wooden log in his hands and the other boy Padam was carrying a metal rod in his hands. That they were brutally beating up my nephew Raju Sharma. That I separated them after getting in between them and instructed Raju Sharma to go back to his house. That Akash was saying that everyday Raju comes near our Rehri (cart) and this negatively impacts out clientele, today we shall kill him.
After that I came back to my house after making them understand. That today morning I got to know that Akash and Padam both have against physically abused my nephew Raju Sharma and have killed my nephew Raju Sharma by inflicting injuries upon him. Legal action be taken against them. Sd/- Radhika. Radhika wife of Jitender, resident of 965/ 31, Kamal Nagar, Jhajjar Chungi, Rohtak, mobile No. 8708386149." 3.
Total 15 multiple injuries on the person of deceased, who was found lying in the pool of blood in naked condition. Before death of the victim/deceased, complainant had seen the accused person(s) quarreling with deceased, later on, he was found dead.
4.
Trial Court dismissed the bail application of the petitioner - Akash, by observing as under:- "7.
As the recovered iron rod was found having blood group-A of the deceased, the said iron rod has been recovered alongwith the mobile phone and jacket of the deceased from the applicant-accused. The FIR is by named. The earlier bail application filed on behalf of the applicantaccused was dismissed on merit, vide order dated 11.12.2024 after filing of the challan. Therefore, there is no material change in circumstances. Accordingly, no case is made out for grant of regular bail to the applicantaccused. Therefore, the second bail application is hereby dismissed. Papers be tagged with the main case file."
- 3 - 5.
After completion of investigation, challan was filed and thereupon, charges were framed on 05.06.2024. 6.
Learned counsel argues that out of total cited 24 prosecution witnesses, only 02 witnesses have been examined till date. However, he seeks permission to withdraw the instant petition at this stage, as he wishes to file a fresh petition on the same cause of action, if the trial is not completed in the near future.
7.
On the basis of statement of learned counsel for the petitioner, instant petition stands dismissed as withdrawn, at this stage. Pending misc. application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of. (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE March 17, 2026 J.Ram Whether speaking/reasoned:
Yes/No Whether Reportable:
Yes/No